Ex Parte Cashman

671 S.W.2d 510, 1984 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 666
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 23, 1984
Docket69128
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 671 S.W.2d 510 (Ex Parte Cashman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ex Parte Cashman, 671 S.W.2d 510, 1984 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 666 (Tex. 1984).

Opinions

OPINION

McCORMICK, Judge.

A jury convicted applicant of robbery in Cause No. 30,801-205 and enhanced his punishment by one prior conviction, a conviction for robbery in Cause No. 59770 from the Second Judicial District Court, Denver County, Colorado. Applicant was sentenced to fifty years’ confinement. On appeal we affirmed the judgment in a per curiam opinion (Cause No. 59,063, September, 1980).

In his application, applicant attacks the prior conviction (Cause No. 59770) used to enhance his punishment. Applicant has provided the trial court with a certified copy of an order vacating the judgment and conviction in Cause No. 59770. This order is dated January 19,1983, and signed by Sandra I. Rothenberg, Judge of the Denver District Court.

Because it appears that the prior conviction relied on for enhancement purposes has been voided, the applicant is entitled to relief. Ex parte Garcia, 578 S.W.2d 141 (Tex.Cr.App.1979). Furthermore, because a jury was elected to assess punishment in this cause (No. 30,801-205), the applicant is entitled to have a new trial on the issue of guilt as well as punishment. Ex parte Nivens, 619 S.W.2d 184 (Tex.Cr.App.1981); Ex parte Howeth, 609 S.W.2d 540 (Tex.Cr. App.1980).

The relief prayed for is granted. The conviction in Cause No. 20,801-205 is set aside, and the applicant is ordered released to the Sheriff of El Paso County to answer the indictment in Cause No. 30,801-205, with the enhancement paragraph as to said Cause No. 59770 from Denver County, Colorado, dismissed.

It is so ordered.

ONION, P.J., and W.C. DAVIS, J., dissent. MILLER, J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Hill, Michael Charles
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2021
Ex parte Pue
552 S.W.3d 226 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2018)
Ex parte Clay
539 S.W.3d 285 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2018)
Hogue v. Johnson
131 F.3d 466 (Fifth Circuit, 1997)
Hogue v. Scott
874 F. Supp. 1486 (N.D. Texas, 1995)
Ex parte Gonzales
790 S.W.2d 646 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Normand v. State
686 S.W.2d 275 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1985)
Ex parte Todd
669 S.W.2d 738 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
671 S.W.2d 510, 1984 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-cashman-texcrimapp-1984.